Home
|
Contact Us
|
NOM BLOG

In Wake of Anchorage Voting Down Prop 5, Catholic Archbishop Reminds Faithful of Duty to Be Respectful

April 5, 2012 at 3:00 pm

From the Catholic Anchor, the newspaper of the Catholic archdiocese of Anchorage:

"...Anchorage Archbishop Roger Schwietz was among the prominent religious leaders who urged residents to vote against the ballot measure. Following the election, he issued a public statement affirming the dignity of each person.

“The people of the Anchorage Municipality have spoken, and Proposition 5 appears to have been defeated,” he said. ” Although I did not support Proposition 5, I fervently oppose unjust discrimination against any person or group.”

He added: “I pray that Anchorage will strive to be an ever more tolerant city for all our citizens. The basis for our social interaction must remain a deeply held respect for the dignity of each human person — a dignity that comes not from the state but from our Creator. I reiterate what I stated in my pastoral letter, the Catholic Catechism, #2358 states that people with homosexual tendencies ‘must be accepted with respect and compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.’

In the lead up to the vote, Archbishop Schwietz wrote an open letter to area churches warning that Proposition 5 threatens the religious freedoms of churches, schools, businesses and other organizations.

The letter denounced any attempt to “advance disrespect or unjust discrimination against people of homosexual orientation” but stated that there is “an essential distinction between unjust discrimination, which is the arbitrary violation of human rights, and the necessary limitations on the exercise of our rights when it is required to protect the justice that is due to others, and the common good.”

Archbishop Schwietz added: “Proposition 5, regrettably, makes no such distinctions. It sweeps with a broad brush, and would usher in a new era of intolerance in Anchorage, all done in the name of ‘ending discrimination.’”

NOM
By NOM Staff | Posted in Catholic Church, Civility, News | Comments (17)

Watchdog Group: Sen. Saland's Fundraising Overwhelmingly From Non-Constituents

April 5, 2012 at 2:00 pm

This group is pushing a change to election finance laws but in the process uncovered what we suspected, that Sen. Saland is far more popular with pro-SSM millionaires living in New York City and Hollywood than with his own constituents:

On Wednesday, residents and community leaders from Community Voices Heard (CVH) in Poughkeepsie gathered outside the Dutchess County Office Building on Market St to demand that their elected officials that represent them in Albany pass a Fair Elections system during this year's legislative session.

... 2 of every 3 dollars Senator Saland received since 2005 came from donors that live outside his district, and a whopping 96% of his contributions came in as checks over $200. This looks like his contributors are mainly big money contributors that don't even live here. We look forward to working with Senator Saland to address the shortcomings of the state election law that currently prevent New Yorkers without those sorts of big money connections from effectively participating," said Sheila Blanding, a CVH member and Poughkeepsie resident.

NOM
By NOM Staff | Posted in Marriage, New York, Same Sex Marriage | Comments (7)

UNITED! Stand with NOM Against Baseless Attacks from the NY Times!

April 5, 2012 at 1:01 pm

Email Header Image

Dear Marriage Supporter,

Gay marriage activists are on the attack like never before. And it's getting personal.

They are targeting NOM and have pulled out the race card in a desperate attempt to shut us down in this critical election year. Why?

Because they know that our coalition is strong and growing, and NOM has become the single biggest obstacle in their campaign to force same-sex marriage on every American state, county and municipality.

Help fight back with a generous gift today!
A new matching grant will instantly double the impact of your gift!

Donate now

The latest barrage came Tuesday from the Gray Lady herself, when The New York Times editorial board charged NOM with employing a "poisonous political approach" based on "racially and ethnically divisive strategies" to block same-sex marriage.

It's laughable.

As if NOM would presume to tell Black and Hispanic pastors what God says about marriage.

NOM didn't create this issue. The African American and Hispanic communities have always opposed same-sex marriage. It is the gay marriage activists and Democratic party elites who have forced the issue, ignoring the voices of Black and Hispanic voters.

I just spoke with two of my heroes in the fight to defend marriage, Rev. Sen. Ruben Diaz and Bishop Harry Jackson. They are outraged by these latest attacks, and Senator Diaz has already posted a powerful response on his official senate website.

NOM has marched arm-in-arm with countless African American and Hispanic pastors, community leaders and grassroots supporters. They know us. They know our hearts. There is no way the other side can divide us.

If anything, this unprecedented attack has encouraged our Hispanic and African American colleagues to do even more on behalf of marriage.

My friend, we are building an unprecedented coalition of marriage supporters across all racial, ethnic, political and religious lines.

Blacks, whites and Hispanics...Republicans, Democrats and Independents...Catholics and Protestants, Mormons, Jews and atheists...All standing together for the good of marriage!

I promise you this: Marriage is the cause that unites people of all faiths, races and political backgrounds. And nothing The New York Times or anyone else can say will stop us from coming together to defend marriage against these strategically timed attacks designed to distract us from the critical work we need to be doing this year.

Will you help us turn the tables on them?
Click here to help use these personal attacks to launch
a powerful new defense of marriage!

Donate now

Another one of my heroes understands just how critical this moment is, and has given us an ambitious new challenge: He will match every dollar we raise over the next 10 days dollar-for-dollar, up to $200,000!

I hope you will help us take advantage of the opportunity presented by this critical moment. Please click here right away to make your most generous gift—and please remember:

$25 will become $50;
$50 will become $100;
$100 will become $200;
$500 will become $1,000;
and $1,000 will become an amazing $2,000 for the defense of marriage!

Thank you and God bless you.

Brian Brown
By Brian Brown | Posted in Same Sex Marriage | Comments (10)

Appeals Court Hears Arguments on DOMA Challenge

April 5, 2012 at 1:00 pm

The New York Times:

A federal appeals court panel heard arguments Wednesday on whether to uphold a lower court’s finding that a section of the 1996 law banning federal recognition of same-sex marriage is unconstitutional.

The case is the first challenge to the so-called Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, to reach a federal appeals court. In July 2010, Judge Joseph L. Tauro of the United States District Court in Boston sided with the plaintiffs in two separate cases brought by the state attorney general and a gay rights group.

... Mr. Clement — who last week argued before the Supreme Court on behalf of states challenging President Obama’s health care law — told the appeals panel that Congress had a rational basis for defining marriage as between a man and a woman. He said that in 1996, as Hawaii appeared to be the first state moving toward recognizing same-sex marriage, Congress passed the law out of concern that it should have its own definition of marriage.

“Congress could rationally choose to have a uniform definition rather than have it rely upon state law,” Mr. Clement said.

... The three judges on the panel directed most of their questions at Mr. Clement and Mr. Delery. But the questions were measured and did not shed much light on how the court might rule. The judges — Juan Torruella, Michael Boudin and Sandra Lynch, the First Circuit’s chief judge — were appointed by Presidents Ronald Reagan, the elder George Bush and Bill Clinton, respectively.

NOM
By NOM Staff | Posted in DOMA, Law, Marriage, Same Sex Marriage | Comments (5)

Over-Eager MSNBC Host Thomas Roberts Reports Fake Story Targeting NOM!

April 5, 2012 at 12:30 pm

The Daily Caller:

If you’ve ever tuned into to MSNBC weekdays between 11 a.m. and noon ET, you are likely to have seen at least one segment focused on a LGBT issue moderated by host Thomas Roberts. But sometimes, Roberts and company might be trying a little too hard to push these issues to the forefront.

On his Wednesday broadcast, Roberts reported that technology juggernauts Apple and Microsoft were “marrying up” and taking on same-sex marriage opponent the National Organization for Marriage.

“In the meantime, get this,” Roberts said. “Tech rivals Apple and Microsoft are marrying up and asking the National Organization for Marriage its supporters to boycott their companies. This follows the release of secret documents last week showing part of the organization’s strategy to quote ‘drive a wedge’ between blacks and gays on the issue of marriage equality.”

Only one problem: They’re not “marrying up,” at least for now.

The report was apparently based on a “satirical post” published on the Daily Kos on Monday by Scott Wooledge. The post was later republished by The Huffington Post’s comedy section and was presented as satire.

Talk about a rough week!

NOM
By NOM Staff | Posted in Humor, Media | Comments (13)

DumpStarbucks.com: Company Responds to NOM Campaign in Student Newspaper in Georgia

April 5, 2012 at 12:00 pm

Adina Solomon writing for the independent student newspaper of the University of Georgia Red and Black:

Not everyone wants to stop off at Starbucks for a morning latte.

In January, Starbucks issued a statement from Kalen Holmes, executive vice president of the Seattle-based company, supporting Washington state legislation recognizing same-sex marriage.

“This important legislation is aligned with Starbucks business practices and upholds our belief in the equal treatment of partners,” Holmes wrote. “It is core to who we are and what we value as a company.”

More than 25,000 people have signed a petition boycotting Starbucks on DumpStarbucks.com, according to the website.

... The Red & Black received multiple emails from DumpStarbucks.com on behalf of people across Georgia protesting Starbucks’ stance.

... Individual locations of Starbucks do not comment to the media. But a Starbucks company spokesman wrote in an email that Starbucks’ stance has not affected its business.

“Starbucks has many constituents and from time to time we will make decisions that are consistent with our values and heritage but may be inconsistent with the views of a particular group,” the spokesman wrote.

NOM
By NOM Staff | Posted in Dump Starbucks, Georgia | Comments (13)

National Organization for Marriage Demands a Federal Investigation of the Human Rights Campaign and the Internal Revenue Service

April 5, 2012 at 11:03 am

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: April 5, 2012
Contact: Anath Hartmann or Elizabeth Ray (703-683-5004)

"Either the HRC got NOM's tax return from someone with the Internal Revenue Service, or they got it from a hacker who stole it. Either way, it appears that a federal crime may have been committed." —Brian Brown, NOM President—

National Organization for Marriage

Washington, DC — The National Organization for Marriage (NOM), today demanded a federal investigation of the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to determine who was responsible for releasing NOM's confidential federal tax return information to the Huffington Post. Last week the publication posted a copy of NOM's federal tax return for 2008 (Form 990—Schedule B) listing its major donors, which is a confidential document filed only with the IRS. The tax return listed the names and addresses of dozens of NOM's major donors in 2008. All of this information is submitted to the IRS on a confidential basis and is not available for lawful public disclosure.

"It appears that someone with either the IRS or the HRC may have committed a federal crime by illegally obtaining and then releasing a confidential tax return of the National Organization for Marriage," said Brian Brown, NOM's president. "It's clear that the tax return was stolen, either from NOM or from the government. The Huffington Post article says that HRC claimed they received the document from a ‘whistleblower.' But the term ‘whistleblower' is completely inapt. We're talking about a criminal who has stolen confidential tax return information. We demand to know who this criminal is, whether they work for the HRC or the IRS, and how they obtained confidential tax information filed only with the US government."

It is illegal for a government official or employee to make use of or publicly release a taxpayer's tax return. The form 990 Schedule B is submitted by nonprofit groups to the IRS and includes information on donor identity, including name, address and contribution amount. While federal law requires that nonprofit groups make their form 990 filings available for public inspection, the law provides that Schedule B information—the name and address of the contributor—is redacted, leaving only the amount given and the date of the donation as publicly-available information. Here, the un-redacted Schedule B was somehow obtained by the HRC. That information could only have come from the IRS itself, or have been stolen from NOM.

"I would like to know what the HRC knew and when did they know it," Brown said. "It certainly appears that either the HRC was involved in illegally obtaining this tax return themselves, or they worked with a criminal who stole it from NOM or the IRS. Either way, it appears that a federal crime may have been committed."

Brown said he would present a written demand for an investigation to both the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, and to the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service.

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray (x130), [email protected], or Anath Hartmann, [email protected], at 703-683-5004.

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

NOM
By NOM Staff | Posted in Human Rights Campaign, Law, Press Releases, Same Sex Marriage | Comments (46)

Voters, Defying Polls, Reject Prop 5 in Anchorage

April 5, 2012 at 11:00 am

The New York Times is reporting in a totally surprise move that Prop 5, which would have established gender identity and sexual orientation as protected legal categories, was defeated by voters 58%-42&. The campaign against it was outspent 4-1.  The main theme of the campaign (see some of their ads here) was that Alaska is already a tolerant place, and that both gay bar owners and Christian bookstore owners should be allowed to hire people with similar views on sex.

Unusual development.  We report you decide:

The New York Times:

"...In [Anchorage's] citywide ballot measure, voters overwhelmingly rejected language, known as Proposition 5, that would have added protections for people regardless of “sexual orientation or transgender identity” to the city’s civil rights laws.

A surprisingly strong turnout caused many polling sites to run out of ballots late Tuesday, and as many as 8,000 votes, possibly more, had not been counted on Wednesday, said Barbara Gruenstein, the clerk for the Municipality of Anchorage. But Proposition 5 trailed by nearly 9,000 votes, defying polls that had suggested it would succeed.

“Amazing what happens when the curtain closes behind you in a voting booth,” Jim Minnery, the chairman of Protect Your Rights Campaign — Vote No on Prop. 5, said Wednesday morning in an e-mail.

The vote followed an unusually loud and expensive campaign for a city ballot measure in Anchorage. The organizers of Proposition 5, a group called One Anchorage, included prominent politicians from both sides of the aisle (Alaska’s United States senators, Lisa Murkowski, a Republican, and Mark Begich, a Democrat, both said they supported it), and the group outspent the opposition more than 4 to 1.

One Anchorage, which had raised about $340,000 as of last week, received some of its support from outside the state, including a $25,000 donation from Tim Gill, a Colorado billionaire who has given generously to gay causes. Opposition was led by conservative religious leaders in Alaska, including within the Roman Catholic Church, and was financed largely by one source, the Anchorage Baptist Temple and its leader, the Rev. Jerry Prevo.

NOM
By NOM Staff | Posted in News, Politics | Comments (9)

Volokh: "May the Government Force You to Print Ideological Materials You Don’t Want to Print?"

April 5, 2012 at 10:30 am

Legal expert Eugene Volokh:

That’s the question brewing in Lexington, Kentucky. The Gay and Lesbian Services Organization has filed the following complaint with the Lexington Human Rights Commission.

... even if the Ordinance does prohibit what Hands On Originals did ... then the Ordinance unconstitutionally compels speech, because it requires printers to print material that they do not want to print. Abood v. Detroit Bd. of Ed. (1977) and Keller v. State Bar (1990) reaffirmed that the government generally may not compel someone to give over money to a private or even quasi-public entity when that money will be used for political or ideological speech. (There is an exception for when the government is acting as employer or regulator of the bar, and the compulsory payments are germane to the collective bargaining functions of a union or a bar association, but that does not apply here.) If so, then requiring someone to actually physically print political or ideological speech is an even clearer First Amendment violation.

Indeed, speech on T-shirts is as protected as speech in books. Under the GLSO’s view, a book publisher that is opposed to (say) Scientology could be required to print pro-Scientology books. Likewise, a printer that hates Nazi ideology could be required to print pro-Nazi leaflets in those jurisdictions — such as Washington, D.C. and Seattle — that ban public accommodations discrimination based on political affiliation. That, it seems to me, can’t be constitutional: Though the publishers (or the T-shirt printer) would be required to produce speech, rather than utter or display it himself, the creation of speech is itself speech, and compelled creation of speech is a speech compulsion.

... Any printer, whether religious or not, has a First Amendment right to choose what messages it will print and what messages it won’t print.

NOM
By NOM Staff | Posted in Free Speech, Law, Religious Liberty | Comments (2)

Coalition of African American Pastors Launch Nationwide Campaign Seeking 100K Signatures for Marriage

April 5, 2012 at 10:00 am

From a joint press release by the Coalition for African American Pastors and Education For All:

The Coalition of African American Pastors (CAAP) and Education for All consist of pastors, leaders, and organizations whose mission is to protect and promote life, the sanctity of marriage, and to advocate for K - 12 students, especially those living in urban areas.

Our group of distinguished leaders from across America is launching a campaign today to garner 100,000 signatories supporting marriage between one man and one woman. This one hundred day campaign will be highlighted at the leadership summit and the news conference at The Heritage Foundation in May.

Bishop George D. McKinney, Bishop Felton Smith and Rev. William Owens will lead in ensuring the 100,000 names for the marriage campaign around the nation. They plan to travel to various cities around the country to gather signatures, but the thrust of the campaign will begin in North Carolina where there is a marriage vote slated for May 8, 2012.

Rev. Owens stated that the civil rights he marched and fought for in the late 50s and early 60s is being seized by the radicals who want to take advantage of a long and hard fight for civil rights and use it for their own agenda on same-sex marriage.

These leaders agree that they will not sit back and let the rights they fought so hard for be distorted and used by the homosexual community to further their agenda. "We will host a news conference to let the Washington politicians know that we want them to protect the family," exclaimed Rev. Owens

For more information on how to support this effort, please contact [email protected].

NOM
By NOM Staff | Posted in Marriage, North Carolina, Same Sex Marriage, United for Marriage | Comments (3)

Video: Why Children Need a Mom and Dad

April 5, 2012 at 9:00 am

Kalley Yanta in this Minnesota Marriage Minute explains why children need a mom and dad, and why not just any two adults will do:

"It is an accepted truth of human existence that ... children do best when they are raised by their biological parents. A recent report by Child Trends, a non-partisan research organization, summarized the scholarly consensus on marriage this way: 'Research clearly demonstrates that family structure matters for children, and the family structure that helps children the most is the family headed by two biological parents in a low-conflict marriage.'"

See the whole video:

NOM
By NOM Staff | Posted in Marriage, Same Sex Marriage | Comments (102)

Sen. Rev. Ruben Diaz: "NOM Has Given Voice to the Voiceless"

April 4, 2012 at 1:30 pm

A statement by New York State Senator and pro-marriage hero Rev. Ruben Diaz:

You should know that like many Black and Hispanic members of the clergy in New York and throughout the United States, I am exceptionally grateful for the National Organization for Marriage, and for NOM’s President, Brian Brown.

I write this as a Democrat, as a State Senator and as the President of the New York Hispanic Clergy Organization, which represents tens of thousands of Hispanic and Black Christians.

On behalf of all those churches, I am here to say: I have worked closely with the National Organization for Marriage and I have marched with NOM's President Brian Brown to defend our civil right to be heard in the debate over the meaning of marriage.

Brian Brown and NOM have done something, that no one has been able to do before: they have helped Black and Hispanic people throughout the nation to find our voice when everyone else rejected us and excluded us from the debate.

You should know that NOM has not divided us, it has brought us unity; NOM has given a voice to the voiceless on the marriage issue, and shown us respect for our core, and sacred values on marriage---a respect the mainstream media has consistently denied us.

NOM
By NOM Staff | Posted in Marriage, New York, Same Sex Marriage, United for Marriage | Comments (9)

Part III: Prof. Jennifer Roback Morse on Why Privatizing Marriage is Impossible

April 4, 2012 at 1:00 pm

Today on Public Discourse, Jennifer Roback Morse argues that privatizing marriage would be unjust to children. This is the third and final installment of her series on the state and marriage:

The primary business of the state is justice. Because children cannot be autonomous, adult society has an obligation in justice to provide institutional structures that protect their most basic interests.

I was once a libertarian activist. I was on the platform committee of the national libertarian party twice in the late seventies. I used to give introductory talks about libertarianism in people's homes when I was a graduate student.

I would begin these talks by describing the problems that contracts between consenting adults could solve. Often someone would ask, "What about children?" I would always admit that children posed a tough problem for libertarianism, but that we would deal with it in a more advanced lesson. Somehow the time for that more advanced lesson never came.

It was only when I had children of my own that I came to see that something was deeply wrong with the way I had been avoiding the "tough questions" about children. In my personal experience of parenthood, I have had responsibility for profoundly neglected children. These children were permanently damaged by lack of relationship. I came to see that we libertarians have been starting our theorizing from the perspective of adults who are equipped to take care of themselves, make contracts, keep promises, defend their own property, and respect other people's property.

Read Part I of this story here.

Read Part II of this story here.

NOM
By NOM Staff | Posted in Marriage, Politics, Same Sex Marriage | Comments (1)

ADF Attorney on the Rights of Business Owners to Follow Their Conscience

April 4, 2012 at 12:30 pm

Byron Babione is senior counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund:

"Imagine a T-shirt print shop run by owners who openly practice homosexual behavior. Let’s call it “Tolerance 101.” They make T-shirts for community events, annual “gay pride” rallies, and sports teams around their city. Now, imagine that a major Christian ministry contacts the company to have them make T-shirts that will be worn at an event supporting marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

Tolerance 101 declines to the make the shirts. In short, the managing owner exercises his prerogative as a business owner to refuse to communicate a message in genuine conflict with his beliefs. Tolerance 101 does business all the time with heterosexuals and even has heterosexual employees, so it’s not about discrimination against any person. It’s simply about not wanting to further a message the owners so deeply oppose. Tolerance 101 even goes the extra mile and finds another T-shirt shop willing to do the job at the same price.

This scenario never happened, but if it did, it’s almost certain that the Christian ministry would not be traipsing off to the local human rights commission to file a discrimination complaint. But turn the tables and see what happens.

A company called Hands On Originals decided to not make T-shirts for an upcoming “gay pride” event in Lexington, Kentucky. As a result of Hands On Originals’ decision, the Gay and Lesbian Services Organization of Lexington has filed a complaint with Lexington’s Human Rights Commission and is pushing what many would consider an all-out smear campaign against the T-shirt company for exercising a prerogative it would almost certainly want to reserve for itself..." -- TownHall

NOM
By NOM Staff | Posted in Corporate Ethics, Free Speech, Religious Liberty | Comments (15)

Christian Business Owners Investigated by Human Rights Commission Over T-Shirts for Gay Pride Event

April 4, 2012 at 12:00 pm

CitizenLink:

As the investigation of a Christian-owned T-shirt company in Kentucky continues, a member of the county human-rights commission says the owners of the Christian business may not have the same rights as others.

In turning down a bid to print T-shirts for a local gay-pride event, the owners of Hands On Originals said it was a free-speech issue — that printing T-shirts affirming homosexuality conflicts with their faith.

The group investigating the complaint, the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Human Rights Commission, is taking a different view.
“It wasn’t necessarily the message that was being rejected,” said executive director Raymond Sexton. “It was allegedly based on the sole fact that the individuals who were bring the shirts happened to be a protected class, in this case homosexuals.”

... Sexton said the commission will be applying a litmus test to find out just how “Christian” Hands On Originals is by comparing the business it’s turned down with proposals it’s accepted.

NOM
By NOM Staff | Posted in Corporate Ethics, Free Speech, Religious Liberty | Comments (9)
Home NOM Blog Donate Advocacy Center
Copyright 2012